The OCTAGON vs The RING...

REED is Hoping Some of the More ASTUTE MMA Posters can Speak INTELLIGENTLY on the Pros AND Cons of the Octagon vs. the Ring...

The ADVANTAGES of Competing in 1 Over the Other...

A Guy like Cro Cop Failed MISERABLY 1nce he Got in the Cage, but Guys like Chuck, Rampage, Wanderlai & Anderson Silva have Made the TRANSITION....

REED DOESN'T Want this to DEVOLVE into a "Better or Worse" Thread...Instead, REED just Wants Intelligent Opinions on the Pro's & Con's of Both, Por Favor???...


REED:mj:

 

Easier to trap your opponent in the corner in a ring.

The octagon is bigger and is used as a tool by fighters to trap opponents and keep them in check while they do their thing.

In short, the ring favors strikers, octagon wrestlers.

 

Actually, it's easier to trap your opponent in a cage IMO. When do you ever see a guy on top try to drag his opponent to the corner of the ring the way they do in the cage? The cage is a weapon.

 

that's pretty much what he said, no? :dunno:

 

Maybe he meant cage?

 

Well different traps. Easier to trap during standup in the corner of the ring. Easier to trap your opponent in the clinch in a cage.

 

RING - FAVOR STRIKERS

CAGE - FAVOR DRY HUMPING

 

A ring provides superior visibility for a live audience, but there are no annoying restarts in a cage. The break in the action really ruins the integrity of a fight in my opinion. A good example would be Babalu/Whitehead from last night.

 

The cage leads to a much better fight. No retarded restarts.


TFK

 

And why isn't this thread called 'The Octogon vs The Ring vs. The Yamma Pit!'


TFK

 

what I meant is that you get a higher percentage of boring fights in the cage. Even though most of the top 10 exciting fights have not been in the ring.

 

How did the cage have anything to do with Cro Cop losing in the UFC? He was knocked out in the center of the cage and laid on in the center of the cage in his UFC losses.

 

Boring fighters make boring fights. Not a cage or a ring. Does a cage have some magical powers than drags fighters to the ground and makes them fight a boring fight?

 

:: A cage does have some kind of mysticism about it. Many fighters devise a gameplan around the cage, to use it for the sake of trapping an opponent ala Ortiz/Shamrock. Ortiz's plan was to push Shamrock up into the fence and pound him there. Same game plan executed in all 3 matches, or mismatches I should say.

 

He was losing the fight miserably from the begginning of the fight. He was DEFINATELY a fish out of water. Even in the Congo fight.

 

I don't know where the better fights happen (a fight is a fight) but a ring is WAY better if you're going live.

I have been to a cage event (King of the cage) and it seriously sucks unless you're in the first few rows. When they are wrestling in the corner you can't see anything at all.

 

Absolutely. Seeing an event in a cage live is terrible, unless you're up real close.

But I still like the cage a lot better.


TFK

 

Have you been to a UFC, TFK?

Do you figure that you would get a better view at a UFC rather than a KOTC? Or are they the same?

I have to assume UFC does a better job.

 

UFC, Elite XC, Strikeforce...I've been to them and I don't think there's a whole lot of difference in the view-ability from cageside/floor level.

Depending on where you're sitting, when the action goes to the mat, it may in fact be easier to watch on the overhead TV screens which is sorta like watching a movie from the front row.

The ring's often a little more elevated and doesn't have as many visual obstuctions. There's still some bad angles...primarily in the corners.

 

The only UFC I was at, my seats were in the upper level, and I ended up watching most of the event on the big screen. But even smaller shows I've been to that used a cage, it's tough to see unless you're up close.


TFK

 

Are you saying he would have been like a fish in it's natural habitat if it were a ring?

How exactly did the cage effect anything in either of his UFC losses?

 

Cages are for animals, not people. UFC fighters are human beings/professional athletes. They're not animals, regardless of if they're considered as such.
The ring is far more professional and much easier to view the action.

 

That's just ridiculous.

 

Gonzaga had Cro Crop Pressed AGAINST the Cage for Stretches of their Fight...

While Discussing that Bout Afterwards, Cro Cop Admitted to Doing NO Training Whatsoever N a Cage & How it Threw his "Sense" of his Surroundings OFF...Things like KNOWING How Many Steps it Takes to Get from Ring Center to the Ropes/Cage...Or Fighting in an Octagon vs. a SQUARE...Or Knowing how to Use the Cage to YOUR Advantage (for BALANCE or for Pushing Off)...

Almost from the Beginning of the Gonzaga Fight, Cro-Cop Looked UNCOMFORTABLE...



REED:hammert:

 

Guys in a cage will find the transition to a ring a lot easier than vice versa. The cage can be intimidating to some.

 

Would you feel more comfortable if you were entering a ring or more comfortable where you walk inside a cage and they lock the door behind you? :: Like you're some kind of wild animal or something?

 

I seriously don't think it makes a difference. They are both a place to do the same thing and that is fight. If you're intimidated being in a cage, become a boxer.

 

He was still knocked out cold in the center of the cage. The end had nothing to do with a ring or a cage. He sure as hell did not lose because it was in a cage.

 

COMFORT (or LACK Thereof) can Contribute to your Performance...

REED isn't Saying that Cro Cop Lost BECAUSE of the Cage, but from the Outset, he Appeared more TENTATIVE than he Did in Pride...The 1st Time Cro Cop EVER Performed or even Trained in a Cage was Against Gonzaga...

He was OUT of his Element...


REED:kidcool: